…ROBERT
REICH:
If Donald Trump becomes president…, there are irrevocable negative changes that
will happen in the United States, including appointments to the Supreme Court
that will not be just political wilderness, [but] will actually change and
worsen the structure of this country…
I
think that voting for Donald Trump or equating Hillary Clinton with Donald
Trump is insane. Donald Trump is certainly a product of a kind of system and a
systematic undermining that has occurred in the United States for years with
regard to inequality of income and wealth and political power. But we don’t
fight that by simply saying, ‘All right, let’s just have Donald Trump and hope
that the system improves itself and hope that things are so bad that actually
people rise up in armed resistance.’ That’s insane. That’s crazy…
We’ve
got to look at the long term. We’ve got to understand that Bernie Sanders
brought us much further along than we were before the Sanders campaign. We owe
a lot to Bernie Sanders: his courage, his integrity, his power, the fact that
most people under 30 voted for Bernie Sanders. In fact, if you look at the
people who voted for Bernie Sanders under 30, that was more people than voted for
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton together under the age of 30. We are building
a progressive movement in this country. But over the next four years, I don’t
want Donald Trump to irretrievably make it difficult, if not impossible, for us
to move forward with that progressive movement…
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ:
Chris, I’d like to ask you—you’ve written that liberals are tolerated by the
capitalist elites because they do not question the virtues of corporate
capitalism, only its excesses, and call for tepid and ineffectual reforms.
Could that have also have been said of FDR in the 1930s? Because you were one
of the folks who did not back Bernie Sanders from the beginning…
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Well, I didn’t back Bernie Sanders… because he said that he would work within the
Democratic structures and support the nominee. And I think we have now watched
Bernie Sanders walk away from his political moment… I think he will come to
deeply regret what he has done. He has betrayed these people who believed in
this political revolution. We heard this same kind of rhetoric, by the way, in
2008 around Obama.
A
political campaign raises consciousness, but it’s not a movement. And what we
are seeing now is furious spin—I listened to Ben Jealous just do it—from the
self-identified liberal class. And they are tolerated within a capitalist
system because in a moment like this they are used to speaking to people to get
them to betray their own interests in the name of fear. And I admire Robert
Reich and have read much of his stuff and like his stuff, but if you listen to
what he’s been saying, the message is the same message of the Trump campaign,
and that is fear. And that is all the Democrats have to offer now and all the
Republicans have to offer now.
And
the fact is, from climate change alone, we have no time left. I have four
children. The future of my children, by the day, is being destroyed because of
the fact that the fossil fuel industry, along with the animal agriculture
industry, which is also as important in terms of climate change, are destroying
the ecosystem on which we depend for life. And neither party has any intention
to do anything about it.
AMY
GOODMAN:
What should Bernie Sanders have done?
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Bernie Sanders should have walked out and run as an independent… And defied the
Democratic Party.
AMY
GOODMAN:
Take up the invitation of Dr. Jill Stein—
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Yes.
AMY
GOODMAN:
—and run on a ticket with—
CHRIS
HEDGES:
She offered to let him run on the top of the ticket. That’s what he should have
done. And the fact is, you know, let’s not forget that Bernie has a very
checkered past. He campaigned for Clinton in '92. He campaigned for Clinton
again in ’96, after NAFTA—the greatest betrayal of the working class in this
country since the Taft-Hartley Act of 1948—after the destruction of welfare,
after the omnibus crime bill that exploded the prison population, and, you
know, we now have… 350,000 to 400,000 people locked in cages in this country
are severely mentally ill. Half of them never committed a violent crime. That’s
all Bill Clinton. And yet he went out and campaigned. In 2004, he called on
Nader not to run, to step down, so he could support a war candidate like John
Kerry. And I’m listening to Jealous before talk about the Iraq War. Sixty
percent of the Democratic senators voted for the war, including Hillary
Clinton. The idea that somehow Democrats don’t push us into war defies American
history.
ROBERT
REICH:
Well, all I can say is that at this particular point in time—I mean, again,
many of the things that Chris Hedges is saying, I completely agree with. The
real question here is: What do we do right now? And what do we do to mobilize
and organize a lot of people out there who right now are not mobilized and
organized? And how do we keep the energy building? I disagree with Chris with
regard to Bernie Sanders. I think Bernie Sanders has been a great and is a
great leader right now of the progressive cause.
What
I think we ought to do is develop a third party outside the Democratic and Republican
parties, maybe the Green Party, so that in the year 2020, four years from now,
we have another candidate… that actually holds Democrats’ feet to the fire and
Republicans’ feet to the fire, that develops an agenda of getting big money out
of politics and severing the link between extraordinarily concentrated wealth
and political power in this country. That’s what we ought to be doing…
This
is not just trucking in fear, Chris. But I do fear Donald Trump. I fear the
polls that I saw yesterday. Now, polls, again, this
early in a campaign still—we’re still months away from the election, but they
are indicative. They show Donald Trump doing exceedingly well, beating Hillary
Clinton. And right now, given our two-party system, given our winner-take-all system
with regard to the Electoral College, it’s just too much of a risk to go and to
say, ‘Well, I’m going to vote—I’m not going to vote for the lesser of two
evils. I’m going to vote exactly what I want to do.’ Well, anybody can do that,
obviously. This is a free country. You… vote your conscience… [Y]our conscience
needs to be aware that if you do not support Hillary Clinton, you are
increasing the odds of a true, clear and present danger to the United States, a
menace to the United States. And you’re increasing the possibility that there
will not be a progressive movement; there will not be anything we believe in in
the future because the United States will really be changed for the worse.
That’s
not a risk I’m prepared to take at this point in time… The day after Election
Day, I am going to try to work with Bernie Sanders and anybody else who wants
to work in strengthening a third party—and again, maybe it’s the Green
Party—for the year 2020, and do everything else I was just talking about. But
right now, as we lead up to Election Day 2016, I must urge everyone who is
listening or who is watching to do whatever they can to make sure that Hillary
Clinton is the next president and not Donald Trump.
CHRIS
HEDGES:
…We talk—Robert talks about, you know, building movements. You can’t build
movements in a political system where money has replaced the vote. It’s
impossible. And the Democrats, you know, their bedside manner is different from
the Republicans… Trump is this kind of grotesque figure. He’s like the used car
salesman who rolls back the speedometer. But Hillary Clinton is like… the
managers of Goldman Sachs. They both engage in criminal activities that have… preyed
upon the most vulnerable within this country and are now destroying the middle
class. And to somehow speak as if we are in a functioning democracy, or speak
as if there are any restraints on capitalism, or speak as if the Democratic
Party has not pushed forward this agenda… Obama… has been as obsequious to Wall
Street as the Bush administration. There’s no difference.
ROBERT
REICH:
Chris, you know, I—again, I find this a frustrating conversation, because I
agree with so much of what you have said, but the question is: What do we do
about it? I mean, we are in a better position today,
in the sense that Bernie Sanders has helped mobilize, organize and energize a
lot of Americans, and educated a lot of Americans about the very issues that
you have talked and written about and I have talked and written about. But it
is—the question is: What is the action? What is the actual political strategy
right now?
…I
think political strategy is not to elect Donald Trump, to elect Hillary
Clinton, and, for four years, to develop an alternative, another Bernie
Sanders-type candidate with an independent party, outside the Democratic Party,
that will take on Hillary Clinton, assuming that she is elected and that she
runs for re-election, and that also develops the infrastructure of a third
party that is a true, new progressive party.
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Well, that’s precisely what we’re trying to do. There is a point where you have
to—do I want to keep quoting Ralph [Nader]?—but where you have to draw a line
in the sand. And that’s part of the problem with the left, is we haven’t.
I
covered the war in Yugoslavia, and I find many parallels between what’s
happening in the United States and what happened with the breakdown of
Yugoslavia. What is it that caused this country to disintegrate? It wasn’t
ancient ethnic hatreds. It was the economic meltdown of Yugoslavia and a
bankrupt liberal establishment that, after the death of Tito, until 1989 or
1990, spoke in the language of democracy, but proved ineffectual in terms of
dealing with the plight of working men and women who were cast out of state
factories, huge unemployment and, finally, hyperinflation.
And
the fact is that these neoliberal policies, which the Democratic Party is one
of the engines for, have created this right-wing fascialism. You can go
back—this proto-fascism. You can go back and look at the Weimar, and
it—Republic—was very much the same. So it’s completely counterintuitive.
Of
course, I find Trump a vile and disturbing and disgusting figure, but I don’t
believe that voting for the Democratic establishment—and remember that this—the
two insurgencies, both within the Republican Party and the—were against figures
like Hillary Clinton, who spoke in that traditional feel-your-pain language of
liberalism, while assiduously serving corporate power and selling out working
men and women. And they see through the con, they see through the game.
I
don’t actually think Bernie Sanders educated the public. In fact, Bernie
Sanders spoke for the first time as a political candidate about the reality the
public was experiencing, because even Barack Obama, in his State of the Union
address, was talking about economic recovery, and everything was wonderful, and
people know that it’s not. And when you… dispossess that segment, as large as
we have—half the country now lives in virtual poverty—and you continue to
essentially run a government that’s been seized by a cabal, in this case,
corporate, which uses all of the machinery of government for their own
enrichment and their own further empowerment at the expense of the rest of the
citizenry, people finally react. And that is how you get fascism. That is what
history has told us. And to sit by—every time, Robert… you do exactly what
Trump does, which is [to propagate] fear, fear, fear, fear, fear. And the fact
that we are going to build some kind of… amorphous movement after Hillary
Clinton—it’s just not they way it works…
ROBERT
REICH:
Let me try to inject some hope in here, in this discussion, rather than fear.
I’ve been traveling around the country for the last two years, trying to talk
to tea partiers and conservatives and many people who are probably going to
vote for Donald Trump [and] try to understand what it is that they are doing
and how they view America and why they’re acting in ways that are so obviously
against their self-interest, both economic self-interest and other
self-interest. And here’s the interesting thing I found.
This
great anti-establishment wave that is occurring both on the left and the right
has a great overlap, if you will, and that overlap is a deep contempt for what
many people on the right are calling crony capitalism—in fact, many people on
the left have called it crony capitalism. And those people on the right, many,
many working people, they’re not all white. Many of them are. Many of them are
working-class. Many of them have suffered from trade and technological
displacement and a government that is really turning its back on them, they
feel—and to some extent, they’re right. Many of them feel as angry about the
current system and about corporate welfare and about big money in politics as
many of us on the progressive side do.
Now,
if it is possible to have a multiracial, multiethnic coalition of the bottom 90
percent that is ready to fight to get big money out of politics, for more
equality, for a system that is not rigged against average working people, where
there are not going to be all of these redistributions upward from those of us
who have paychecks—and we don’t even realize that larger and larger portions of
those paychecks are going to big industries, conglomerates, concentrated
industries that have great market power, because it’s all hidden from
view—well, the more coalition building we can do, from right to left,
multiethnic, multiracial, left and right, to build a movement to take back our
economy and to take back our democracy…
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ:
Robert Reich, I’d just like to interrupt you for a second, because we only have
a minute left, and I just wanted to ask Chris one last question. In less than a
minute, if you can, regardless of—you’re voting for Jill Stein, other folks are
going to vote for Clinton and Trump. Where do you feel this massive movement
that has developed over the last few years, this people movement, would have a
better opportunity to grow, under a Trump presidency or under a Clinton
presidency, assuming that one of those two will eventually be elected?
CHRIS
HEDGES:
I don’t think it makes any difference. The TPP is going to go through, whether
it’s Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. Endless war is going to be continued,
whether it’s Trump or Clinton. We’re not going to get our privacy back, whether
it’s under Clinton or Trump. The idea that, at this point, the figure in the
executive branch exercises that much power, given the power of the war industry
and Wall Street, is a myth…
AMY
GOODMAN:
We’re going to have to leave it there, but this is a discussion that will
continue. Chris Hedges, I want to thank you for being with us, Pulitzer
Prize-winning journalist, author of Wages of
Rebellion: The Moral Imperative of Revolt. And former Clinton Labor
Secretary Robert Reich, professor now at the University of California,
Berkeley. His most recent book, Saving
Capitalism.
from
Democracy Now
“…As Adam Gopnik says in an excellent article in The New Yorker, democracies do not simply commit suicide, they are killed by murderers, by people like Trump. Most expressions of support for Trump vastly underestimate the immediate danger Trump poses to the world and minorities of class, race and ethnicity. In contrast, while Hillary Clinton is a warmonger, a cheerleader for neoliberalism and a high-ranking member of the Democratic Party establishment, she is not threatening to take an immediate set of actions that would throw people of color, immigrants and working-class people under the bus. Instead, if she wins the election, she should be viewed as part of a corrupt financial and political system that should be overthrown. While posing danger on a number of economic, political and foreign fronts, Clinton would also expose by her actions and policies the mythological nature of the idea that democracy and capitalism are the same thing. Hopefully, all those young people who followed the dead-end of a Bernie Sanders movement -- and the false suggestion that a political revolution can be achieved by reforming the Democratic Party -- would seize on this contradiction. Sanders revitalized the discourse about inequality, injustice and the need to break down the financial monopolies, but he failed in choosing a political avenue in which such real and systemic change can come about”—Henry A. Giroux.
ReplyDelete"If it is Russia, which it's probably not, nobody knows who it is, but if it is Russia, it's really bad for a different reason, because it shows how little respect they have for our country. When they would hack into a major party and get everything, but it would be interesting. I will tell you this. Russia, if you're listening, I hope you find the thirty thousand emails that are missing. I think you'll probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let's see if that happens next"--Donald Trump.
ReplyDeletefrom Cindy McCullagh:
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing these interesting viewpoints. I think Hedges contradicts himself when he says we cannot allow Trump to be elected, but he favors a 3rd party candidate this late in the election. I think Reich has a more practical view, and I hope things play out this way. It's great to see so many young people looking for real change, and I hope their energies can be directed toward accomplishing this.
Cindy
Alasdair MacIntyre, an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, is on the record on what voters should do in such a situation. He is unequivocal: Voters should reject both candidates. Here is what he wrote:
ReplyDelete"When offered a choice between two politically intolerable alternatives, it is important to choose neither. And when that choice is presented in rival arguments and debates that exclude from public consideration any other set of possibilities, it becomes a duty to withdraw from those arguments and debates, so as to resist the imposition of this false choice by those who have arrogated to themselves the power of framing the alternatives."
“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear of one another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason..." --March 9, 1954, Edward R. Murrow was an extraordinary journalist who opened the doors for all journalists that followed his footsteps. Single handed, Murrow unmasked Joseph McCarthy for the world to see. He exposed McCarthy as a hate monger and a hypocrite. McCarthy never recovered.
ReplyDelete“...Trump is a real danger to the species, the country and the world in general. His views on war and climate change -- along with the promise of violence against his enemies and his unapologetic racism, bigotry and hatred of constitutional rights -- pose some of the greatest dangers to democracy and freedom the US has ever faced..."--Henry A. Giroux.
ReplyDelete“…The Republican Party has actually nominated for president an irresponsible, unrealistic, naïve, petulant, childish, vindictive, prejudiced, bigoted, racist, Islam-o-phobic, anti-Semitic, misogynistic, fascistic, authoritarian, insensitive, erratic, disturbed, irrational, inhuman individual named Donald John Trump. This is madness! Any questions?”--Keith Olbermann
ReplyDelete